If you want to discuss how real chemtrails are, do your part.

In any debate, there are points made, and rebuttals to those points. From the "I don't believe in chemtrails" side, we MUST examine the evidence presented or there is no debate to be had. Every video, every move, every PDF article, and every patent presented as evidence. They all must be looked at, understood, and discussed.

So why do the chemtrailers get a pass? To lazy to look at what is presented? Or is is the source just isn't one you like?

I ask this as I look at yet another thread where the same easily explained things are trotted out as reasons to believe in chemtrails. Why do some planes leave trails when others do not? What's up with the grid things? What about cloud seeding? What about Bill Gates and his foundation?

I do get that new people will be introduced to this theory from time to time. But some of who I see making these claims have been around for a while. They have participated in other chemtrail threads.

The science that explains those white puffy lines in the sky exists, is massive, and it's undisputed. But....you do have to read it for it to have any impact on your thinking.

but, is that the hangup? Fear of having the theory unravel? Fear that you have been wrong?

At least spend the few moments to look at the information presented. Someone thought enough of you to present it.

a reply to: network dude

The only time one of these debates are worth having is when a chemtrail believer has actually gone out and obtained a sample of these supposed "chemtrails" and found evidence of chemical dispersion within. This evidence could be obtained with a hobby drone if they wanted to or they could charter a plane and go fly up themselves. Until such things happen though, there is nothing scientific nor worth talking about in regards to this discussion. Put up or shutup.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I agree with that, but it will not happen. It is the single thing that could end the debate.
Fear of the debate ending is too much for some. (especially if that's how they make their living)

I think it's why the links and information is largely ignored. It's so much easier to claim it's lies put out by "them".
Until "they" say something you want to hear, that is.

a reply to: network dude

Then it helps not to engage these people. Humoring their idiocy only lets them rationalize in their heads that they may be right. If you do decide to engage them, constantly remind them of this shortcoming.

a reply to: network dude

You would think by now, with all the $$ some have made off of this, that one of these 'experts' would have at least rented a plane and obtained direct samples. With legit, no agenda, competent observers.

Once in a while, someone like myself, comes into this forum and actually learns something.

I started a thread months ago, and actually read all the replies. I didn't just wait to argue my pre conceived opinion.

I always try to go in with an open mind and consider ALL the evidence, because in the end all I am interested in is the truth.
Why has not one of the 'believers' obtained direct samples using repeatable scientific principles?

The chemtrail forum reminds me a lot of the 9/11 forum.

a reply to: network dude

All anyone needs to do is look up the weather modification act of Canada, we've had this stuff going on for a long time. This is no conspiracy, it is real. I think the UN had banned any country who held a seat on the UN council, but conveniently neither Canada or the USA actually held a seat when it was enforced. Canada is just as screwed as the USA, which is very sad. TPTB are bent on our destruction, yet they have an amazing way of making it seem that it is for our own good. I still love the land and people where I live, but it breaks my heart that our government policies are destroying everything that we hold dear. I guess the only way to attempt to reverse the legislative damage is to petition the government to stop these acts of abomination.

originally posted by: stosh64

The chemtrail forum reminds me a lot of the 9/11 forum.

Yes.

a reply to: Fireflysky

If the fear you have of that act was explained and you were shown to not have the reason to fear that you do now, would you accept it?

a reply to: network dude

Yes I still want to believe that they have our best interests at heart.

a reply to: Fireflysky

All anyone needs to do is look up the weather modification act of Canada, we've had this stuff going on for a long time.

Cloud seeding is nothing new nor is it something nefarious...at least not since Viet Nam.

This is no conspiracy, it is real. I think the UN had banned any country who held a seat on the UN council, but conveniently neither Canada or the USA actually held a seat when it was enforced.

You do know that the US was the first country calling for the UN treaty and had worked it out with Russia then it was sent to the UN...

The following year, they called for international agreement to avoid the military use of environmental and geophysical modifications and, after exploring the possible uses, reached out to the former Soviet Union (USSR). In 1974 and 1975, U.S. President Richard Nixon and Soviet General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev held three sets of discussions on the issue. In 1975, the two nations began negotiating specific terms at the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament (CCD). Finalized in 1976, the agreed text was sent to the UN General Assembly for consideration during the fall session. On 10 December 1976, the resolution was approved with 96 to 8 votes, 30 abstaining.[1] [2]

en.wikipedia.org...

Seems they would have voted for the thing they helped create.

But feel free to refute anything I post.

Also know this was voted on by the General Assembly which means all countries can vote for it or not...which also includes the US.

About the General Assembly

Functions and powers

The General Assembly (GA) is the main deliberative, policymaking and representative organ of the UN.

Each country has one vote. Some Member States in arrear of payment may be granted the right to vote.

www.un.org...

Seems you might want to update your info.

a reply to: Fireflysky
From the results of a search on your act:

“weather modification activity” includes any action designed or intended to produce, by physical or chemical means, changes in the composition or dynamics of the atmosphere for the purpose of increasing, decreasing or redistributing precipitation, decreasing or suppressing hail or lightning or dissipating fog or cloud.

www.weatherquestions.com...

www.weathermodification.com...


Here is some information on cloud seeding, which is what that act is all about. It's a localized event and affects very localized areas. I do think it should have oversight, but understanding it will help greatly with fears of it being blown out of proportion.

During droughts water is scarce but is it possible to make it rain to provide water.

Experiments in cloud seeding suggest that it may be possible to artificially create rainfall.

Rainfall occurs when supercooled droplets of water – those that are still liquid but are at a temperature below the usual freezing point of zero centigrade – form ice crystals. Now too heavy to remain suspend in the air, these then fall, often melting on their way down to form rain.

Even in dry areas the air usually contains some water. This can be made to come together and form ice crystals by seeding the atmosphere with chemicals such as silver iodide or dry ice.

They work to promote rainfall by inducing nucleation – what little water is in the air condenses around the newly introduced particles and crystallises to form ice.

The ‘seeds’ can be delivered by plane or simply by spraying from the ground.

But does it work?

It’s hard to tell for sure. As is often the case with weather and climate, it’s impossible to carry out a controlled experiment – so, in areas of increased precipitation, we can’t know whether it would still have rained even if the clouds hadn’t been seeded.

Success has been claimed for trials in Australia, France, Spain and the US. In the United Arab Emirates, the technique is credited with the creation of 52 storms in the Abu Dhabi desert, while China boasts of having used the technology in reverse to keep the Beijing Olympic Games of 2008 dry.

Recent research, however, suggests that it’s not as effective as was previously believed.

a reply to: network dude

Yes, it is quite easy to create nano particulate metals and then spray them in the air, which then creates a hot pocket of atmosphere encouraging the water in that area to evaporate up into the air and then precipitate back down to earth. The most human friendly noble metal is silver from what I recall, but it is still toxic and even though it is a fairly inexpensive metal, I don't know if silver is what is used in this process or if a cheaper metal is used. I really love the idea of the science behind it, but I just don't know the long term repercussions for our future generations and I always thought that is what we as a society were suppose to protect.

a reply to: Fireflysky

How do these particles create a hot pocket of air? Where does the heat emanate from? Also, is this hot pocket in the form of a column all the way down to the surface? If not, why would water on the ground evaporate?

If the water is already on the ground, what is the point in encouraging it to evaporate and fall again?

Sorry for the questions but I don't think you've thought this through or understand how cloud seeding works.

a reply to: waynos

The solar rays through our atmosphere help to heat up the area where it is sprayed, then that extra heat encourages the the water on ground to evaporate into the sky. It basically intensifies the heat from the sun.

So say I were to charter a plane and collect samples and have an independent lab test samples would you be my friend then network dude and be on my side of the fence. 😂😂😉

a reply to: ATF1886

If you followed the scientific method when carrying out your sample collections, then I'm sure he would.

You'd have busted open a world wide conspiracy.

We live in a hail belt where the clouds are seeded to minimise the hailsize and damage they create. I believe the insurance companies finance this.
I think it would be really neat to see a reality show on these planes flying into the storms! Those pilots must be really brave.

Hmmm.... time to start putting money away..a reply to: Chadwickus

originally posted by: ATF1886
Hmmm.... time to start putting money away..a reply to: Chadwickus

Have a word with Michael J Murphy. He spent $50000 on the first movie and has already raised nearly $7000 to produce the latest one

www.gofundme.com...

Or you could just wait for Mathius Hancke to release his movie Overcast. He has taken samples from a trail! Unfortunately for some reason he's keeping quiet about the results - you'll have to wait to see the movie to find out if the world's population is being secretly poisoned from above by the powers that be

a reply to: mrthumpy

This is an interesting bit of information, I've never heard of this Mathius fellow before, or his movie.

I'll have to Google him and see if he's on the level or not